Just another WordPress.com site

Bifurcation

Hi Helen-

Thank you for your thoughtful response to my paper. Curiously, there have been some major changes in the way that KS is being disseminated.
I won’t go into detail here, but these changes have affected my personal approach to KS, which is now comparable in some ways to my approach to many
religions as being compromised by custodial entities.

The suspicious element common to all is a binding of matter to spirit. Also, I don’t know if your friends are intimate with inner circles of KS, but there are two or more
“schools of thought” emerging within the KS paradigm as we speak.

Interesting that you bring up the Constructivists and early abstractionists, as they both were reaching toward elements of matter and energy within conscious fields.
At the same time, I am finding that a semiotic approach used by some academics causes distinctions to be distorted that should really be left alone. Just today I read
an essay about a science fiction story where aliens were using living tools derived from biological material and imbued with aspects of consciousness.
This was called a “literalization of Marshall McLuhan’s thesis that all media are prosthetic extensions of ourselves.” Tools that are alive and have consciousness are not prosthetic extensions.

Entanglement is not the same as vitalism. It’s just a small example of the way that deconstructive thinking has led to destructive thinking. But I’m ok with that, in fact it’s probably a good thing, since the closer we get to becoming cyborgs, the more we will realize how, with the help of others much smarter than we are, we have lost our way.

Sorry, I’m rambling a bit…. I’m a few days behind with class, I plan to catch up shortly, I’ve just been swamped with presentations, more papers, and my core exam, which is May 13th at 10 A.M. in the Art conference room in case you want to come and watch my version of the dance.